[Fuego] Query about the latest status of xml change and fuego integration

Liu, Wenlong liuwl.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com
Thu Sep 7 11:40:33 UTC 2017


Hi Tim,

> P.S. I note that the Fuego mailing list was not CCed on this message.  Do
> you mind if I send a copy to the list, so others can see the status?
I don't mind at all and sorry that I didn't CC the Fuego maillist before.

Best Regards
Liu


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bird, Timothy [mailto:Tim.Bird at sony.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2017 2:26 AM
> To: Liu, Wenlong/刘 文龙 <liuwl.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com>; Daniel Sangorrin
> <daniel.sangorrin at toshiba.co.jp>
> Cc: 'Jan-Simon Moeller' <jsmoeller at linuxfoundation.org>; Cai, Song/蔡 嵩
> <cais.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com>; Kusakabe, Yuichi/日下部 雄一
> <yuichi.kusakabe at jp.fujitsu.com>; Oki, Kyohhei/沖 恭平
> <kyohei.oki at jp.fujitsu.com>
> Subject: RE: Query about the latest status of xml change and fuego
> integration
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Liu, Wenlong [mailto:liuwl.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com]
> > Hi Daniel and Tim,
> >
> > We have tested the "testplan_ltsi.json" and "testplan_docker.json"
> recently.
> > And some related patches were commited to the branch "next" of "fuego-
> > core", except for "Functional.LTP" and "Functional.glib" which need to
> > be fixed in the next several days.
> 
> Thanks.  I already accepted the patch for the http_proxy fix, and I'll look
> at the others today.   I did a wording change on the commit message for
> the
> http_proxy fix, so you might need to update your fuego next branch.
> 
> >
> > I know that the "testplan_agl.json" related tests also need to
> > tested/fixed in the next setp.
> > But if other testplans should also be confirmed?
> These testplans are the most important ones.  If we could get all issues
> fixed with these, it would be great.
> 
> > If not, we'll start the job below.
> > - running the existing AGL tests using Fuego instead of JTA, and
> > reporting back the results
> 
> Sounds good.
> 
> I'll just add a note about the status of the code.  The plotting code for
> Benchmarks is currently broken.  There may be some churn in my 'next' branch
> as I work on this over the next few days.  I'll try not to check anything
> in which actually breaks the Jenkins interface.  However, if you notice
> that plots are missing, or are producing unexpected values, please just
> ignore it for now.  You can report it, but please understand that the Jenkins
> visualization of Fuego test results on the job pages is undergoing some
> work this week.
> 
> Thanks very much for your testing and bugfixes.
>  -- Tim
> 
> P.S. I note that the Fuego mailing list was not CCed on this message.  Do
> you mind if I send a copy to the list, so others can see the status?
> 





More information about the Fuego mailing list